VILLAGE OF LONG GROVE
Long Grove Plan Commission
December 7, 2004 Meeting Minutes
Chairman Present:
Fred Phillips.
Commissioners Present: Eduardo Acuna, Joseph Di Iorio,
Nicholas Fasano, Robert Jenkins, Lisa Phillips and Karen Schultheis.
Commissioner Absent: Michael Dvorak.
Also Present: Village Attorney Julie Tappendorf and Village
Planner
1.
Call to Order
Chairman
Phillips called the meeting to order at 8:02 p.m.
2.
Approval of the November 2, 2004 Draft Meeting
Minutes.
Commissioner
3.
Subdivision Plat Amendment to Remove Restricted Area
Language from the Creekside Subdivision Plat, Located at
Peter Wifler, attorney for
D’Ascenzi, proposed that the language “restricted area” on the Creekside
Subdivision Plat for lot 29,
Village Planner Cage
responded that the Village files do not indicate what restricted area
means. The Conservancy Scenic Corridor
Committee was not successful in finding out what the purpose was in making that
portion of the property a restricted area.
Village Attorney Tappendorf
stated Village has not found any information or records to state what the
restricted area was for. There was no
note on the plat indicating such a restriction.
Peter Wifler stated plats
19 and 20 were changed under similar circumstances to lot 29.
Resident Bobbie O’Reilly
noted that the original plat does not show lots 19, 20 or 29 as having
restrictions on them and that the restrictions must have been added at a later
date. Other lots had restrictions
because of a lake and creek in the area.
Resident Richard Bertsche who owns lot 28, remarked that the wetlands area is
depicted as very small on the map while in reality a much larger portion of
that area is always wet. A lot of water
and drainage goes through that area.
Commissioner
Lisa Phillips questioned if Storm Water Management has been contacted to
actually look at the property and address the wetlands.
Peter
Wifler stated that the property owners are seeking an easement for ingress and
egress through the wetland area. The
owners do not intend to build in that wetland area and therefore they would not
be disturbing the wetlands. Manhard
Engineering produced a wetland delineation in April
2004 and this was reviewed by the CSCC in August 2004.
Village
Engineer Joe Chiczewski asked if septic tests were ever conducted on this property?
Barbara
Turner asked if any soil analysis was conducted?
Village
Planner Cage commented that because the restricted definition is unclear, the
protection of wetland and drainage should be important in making a decision.
Commissioner
Lisa Phillips asked if a title search had been conducted. Peter Wifler responded he did not know if a
title search had been done recently.
Village
Attorney Tappendorf replied a title search can be done. The search should show restricted area. Peter Wifler noted the title search will not
define restricted areas.
Commissioner
Fasano questioned whether Storm Water Management knows anything or if other
agencies would be able to determine if there is a reason for the restricted
area.
Village
Attorney Tappendorf said that the restricted area is shown clearly on the plat.
Mr.
Bertsche commented that when adjacent properties are affected it should be a
courtesy or requirement to be posted for public hearing. Village Planner Cage responded that this
request does not require a public hearing but it is noticed at a public meeting
to the newspapers and that it is also posted on the Village website and prior
notice is given to the Home Owner’s Association.
Dave
Hembd, a surveyor for the Lake County Health Department stated that there were
no laws on wetlands until 1989. He
commented that the soil on the property is probably hydraulic (wet soil).
Bobbie
O’Reilly stated that at one time there was a restricted area on her property
but that the restriction was removed.
There was an error on the plat.
The septic tank was placed where restricted area had been indicated.
Commissioner
Fasano suggested getting agencies to write letters stating removal of restriction
will not affect usage of property. Resident
O’Reilly asked who is going to define the restricted terminology?
Mr.
Bertsche suggested finding out why line was there or have letters to
substantiate the line.
Village
Attorney Tappendorf stated the easement is governed by Lake County Storm Water
Management.
Resident
Tony Dean advised that a title search should be completed and that the Village
should notify the agencies with an interest, pending title search,
that we are going to remove restricted area unless agencies object. Peter Wifler answered that he would be
willing to draw up letters to send to agencies.
Commissioner
Lisa Phillips suggested a title search be done and the Lake County Health
Department be contacted. Peter Wifler
agreed that a title search should be conducted,
letters should be sent to Storm Water Management and the Lake County Health
Department. The letters should be sent
from a Village Representative and on Village letterhead.
Village
Engineer Chiczewski indicated more details are needed with regard to drainage
issues.
Commissioner Lisa Phillips motioned
to continue the issue to the next available Plan Commission meeting to address
the title search and the letters to
4.
Minor Plat Amendment for HBD Joint Venture (Hummel) to
Reflect a Change in Sanitary Sewer Location within The
Indian Creek Club Subdivision.
Village Planner Cage
outlined that a sanitary sewer located in the Indian Creek Club Subdivision had
been illegally installed within a wetland.
The petition was to relocate the sewer outside of the wetland and the
affected land will be returned to its original status. This was a mitigation project that the
Village supported to correct an original mistake on the developers part.
Commissioner Fasano made a
motion to recommend approval of a minor amendment to reflect a change in the
sanitary sewer location within the Indian Creek Club Subdivision with reference
to the plans submitted by Precision Land Surveyors, Inc. Commissioner Schultheis seconded the motion. Ayes, all. Nays, none. Commissioner Di Iorio abstained. motion carried.
5.
Public Hearing Regarding the Purpose of Considering a
Request to Amend the Long Grove Zoning Map, Amend the Long Grove Zoning Code,
Grant a Special Use Permit, Grant Approval of a Planned Development, and any
other Zoning Relief Necessary to Allow the Construction and Operation of Menard’s Store and other Commercial Buildings
on the Property Located at the Northeast Corner of Lake Cook Road and Hicks
Road (approximately 36 acres), submitted by Lake Cook, LLC.
The Public hearing was opened
to discuss text and map amendment.
Village Planner Cage
explained that a proposal was presented to the Village of Long Grove to build a
Menards store and outlot buildings. The
petitioner has asked that the property be rezoned commercial.
In order to consider the
proposal, it would be necessary to amend the zoning map since the property
being considered is not a commercial zoning district. This public hearing is to address the
rezoning of the property to create a new commercial zoning district in Long
Grove.
Village Attorney Tappendorf
added that it is the intent of the Village to draft a new zoning district to be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, not less than 20 acres and no special
permit for open space and parks. The
proposed development would include home improvement stores, retail stores and
restaurants. The development would be
two stories in height with a perimeter yard of 30 feet. A public sanitary sewer would be included in
the plan. All landscaping plans would be
approved by the Village. The parking
requirements would be the same as the B2 zoning district.
Commissioner Di Iorio asked
how the 35-feet height is measured.
Village Attorney Tappendorf responded that the height may need to be
modified. Menards is intending to be
taller than 35-feet. B1 zoning would
mean a 30-foot height restriction; B2 zoning heights varies
depending on use.
Commissioner Lisa Phillips asked if sign would be
included in height. Village Attorney
Tappendorf responded that the sign is part of the principal structure and would
be included in the height.
Commissioner Acuna asked if
permeable materials could be used. He voiced
concern about the effects on drainage.
He also questioned if gas stations would be part of the
development. Village Attorney Tappendorf
replied that all aspects of the development would need to be approved by the
Village.
Commissioner Acuna questioned if there would be enough
flow within the parking lot at this location?
Commissioner Lisa Phillips
voiced concern about impervious setback.
Would zoning district apply to other areas of the Village? Commissioner Lisa Phillips would like to see
setback number increased.
Commissioner Fasano added
he would like impervious setback addressed.
He would like the new zoning district to be specific to
Commissioner Jenkins stated
his concerns. He believes there should
be two separate sections. Lighting and building
heights are factors to consider.
Commissioner
Schultheis concerned about how to keep commercial buildings away from
residents. She approves of open-ended
uses and not specific.
Resident
O’Farrell (6600 RFD), could not understand adding more traffic to the area was
a good idea, especially the time of day the stores will open – prime time for
rush hour traffic. Chairman Fred Phillips
responded that traffic engineers will be assessing the area and traffic lights
and extra lanes will be necessary.
Village
Attorney Tappendorf asked several questions:
1. Do we include the Routes 53/83 area
and include this as a text amendment?
2.
Will the perimeter yard be applied to whole area?
3.
What would be the impervious surface limit be?
Resident
Don Robinson (2541 RFD), wondered if the Village doesn’t approve Menard’s plan
would they be likely to locate in another community and, if so, would Village
have any control over situation? Village
Planner Cage said that was a possibility and that the property would include
both the Menards and six outlots.
Commissioner Fasano made a
motion to close the public hearing on the text amendment and map amendment,
Commissioner Jenkins seconded the motion.
Ayes, all.
Nays, none, motion carried.
The Public
hearing was then formally opened by Chairman Fred Phillips to discuss special
use permit. He swore in all those
members in the audience who were going to speak during the public hearing.
Paul
Shadle with Piper Rudnick, summarized the Menard’s
proposal. The Menard’s store would be a
total of 162,000 sq. ft., with an additional 42,000 sq. ft. of commercial space
on the six outlots. Nine acres would be
set aside as open space and recreational.
Proposal is consistent with Comprehensive Plan objectives.
Theron
Berg, the representative for Menards, gave brief overview on Menard’s
company. Menard’s is privately-held,
family owned. There are 200 stores in
nine Midwestern states. The hours of
operation for all stores are 6:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday
and 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Sunday.
Typically there are 20-25 deliveries made during regular business hours
mostly 7a.m. to 10 a.m. Trips by public
services (police, fire, etc.) are approximately 1 or 2 per month.
Mr.
Berg indicated that the first year revenue for the proposed Menard’s is
projected to be $40 million with an increase of 7% per year thereafter. The real estate taxes generated would be
about $300,000 per year. There would
also be sales tax generated by the Menard’s store and the
outlots. The
outlots would include 3 multi-use generating approximately $15 million
year one and 3 restaurants generating approximately $9 million year one in
projected sales.
Mark
Kurensky, the architect for Menard’s indicated that the development was
designed to aesthetically fit into Long Grove.
There would be two types of access – visual and physical. The outlots would be
in character with Long Grove including color, size, materials and style. There would be service access at the north
end of the site. The plan would include
small buildings measuring 5,500, 6,500 and 8,000 sq. ft. with Menard’s behind
them. Building A would be a 1 story
building, 6,500 sq. ft., 31 ft. high with shingles, siding, 1 or multi-tenant,
traditional colors and 4-sided architecture.
Building B would be 5,500 sq. ft., brick with sloping roof, 1 or multi-tenant, and 4-sided architecture. Building C would be 9,600 sq. ft. The proposed Menard’s building would be approximately
41-feet high. The buildings would be set
randomly. A storm water retention pond
would be added and would act as a buffer between stores and
Tracey
Richard from Manhard Consulting, added there would be
two retention basins to catch storm water.
He indicated there would be far less water to leave site than currently
happening. Sanitary service would consist
of pumping by force from a main up north.
Water service would consist of a well on the property for domestic
use. There would also be service for
fire protection.
Louea
Aboona a traffic engineer working on behalf of Menards, explained that
Village
Planner Cage indicated there would be traffic lights, a 5-lane improvement at
the southern entrance and a 3-lane improvement at the northern entrance. Menard’s would be responsible for the
installation of the landscaping.
Commissioner
Di Iorio asked how much traffic would there be from the north compared to the
south. Mr. Aboona indicated that
according to his estimations, traffic on
Commissioner
Lisa Phillips indicated she would like to see a right in and right out onto
Commissioner
Fasano’s concerns included:
1. The impact on the property to the
north;
2. The architecture on Hicks side of the
proposed Menard’s store;
3. The parking lot lighting;
4. Restricting uses on the outlots;
5. The right of way off of
6. Easy and safe accessibility for
trucks.
Commissioner
Jenkins stated that the architecture used on the front of the building should
extend to all sides of buildings. He
voiced concern over the safety Geimer’s entrance. Could parking lot be illuminated with lights
lower than 30’?
Commissioner
Schultheis’ concerns were related to security and traffic. Because people loiter near soccer fields,
policing would need to be addressed.
Would subdivision become a cut-through?
Commissioner
Lisa Phillips asked if bushes could be replaced with trees like at Bannockburn
Green. Commissioner Acuna wondered if
evergreens would be more appropriate.
Chairman
Fred Phillips opened the public hearing to the public for comment.
Resident
Barbara Turner asked if there was wetland mitigation. Tracey Richard answered that all wetland mitigation
would be off-site.
Resident
Susan O’Farrell voiced concern over heavy traffic.
Village
Planner Cage and Village Attorney Tappendorf will maintain a list of issues for
Menard’s to address for the next Plan Commission meeting.
Commissioner Acuna motioned to
continue the issue to the next available Plan Commission meeting on January 4,
2005, seconded by Commissioner Fasano, all ayes, no nays. Motion passed.
6.
Affordable Housing Planning and Appeal Act and the
Discussion of How the Village of Long Grove can Effectively Comply with the
Requirements of this Act.
Village
Attorney Tappendorf suggested discussion on this topic be brought up at a
special January 2005 meeting. Commissioner
Lisa Phillips made a motion to schedule a special meeting on January 18, 2005
for the purpose of discussing affordable housing, seconded by Commissioner Di
Iorio. Ayes all. Nays none. Motion carried.
7. Plan
Commission Scheduled Meeting Dates for 2005.
Chairman
Fred Phillips indicated he will be unable to attend February 1 Plan Commission
meeting. Commissioner Fasano volunteered
to be Chairman Pro-Tem for February 1 meeting if so decided.
Commissioner
Acuna motioned to accept Plan Commission scheduled meeting dates for 2005 with
changes, seconded by Commissioner Schultheis.
Ayes all.
Nays none.
Motion carried.
8.
Plan Commission Scheduled Member Attendance for 2005
Village Board Meetings.
Chairman
Fred Phillips volunteered to fill in on any Village Board meeting a Plan
Commissioner cannot attend. Commissioner
Acuna motioned to accept Plan Commission member attendance for 2005 Village
board meetings, seconded by Commissioner Lisa Phillips. Ayes all. Nays none. Motion carried.
9.
Approval of the November 2, 2004 Draft Meeting
Minutes.
Lisa
Phillips and Robert Jenkins made some changes to page 2, page 4 and page 6. Commissioner Di Iorio motioned to accept the
minutes with the noted changes, second by Commissioner Schultheis, all ayes, no
nays. Motion passed.
10. Adjournment: Next Regular Meeting, Tuesday, January 4,
2005, at 8:00 pm
Motion
to adjourn by Commissioner Di Iorio, seconded by Commissioner Acuna, Ayes, all. Nays, none. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 11:55 p.m.
Respectfully
submitted by,
Sherry
Shlagman, Administrative Assistant
Village of Long Grove